Horton House Residential Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

People were kept safe from risk of abuse or harm. Staff told us and records showed that staff had received safeguarding training and were aware of the provider's safeguarding procedure and their responsibilities to report any suspicions of abuse and whistle blow if they had any concerns about quality of care. People were supported by sufficient numbers of consistent staff who had been suitably recruited and trained to carry out their role and manage people's care needs. Effective systems were in place to manage and monitor people's risks.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People told us they felt safe living at the home. One person said, "I feel really safe … we have a nice bunch of workers." People spoke highly of the staff and told us they felt confident in raising concerns. One person explained, "If I'm not happy I can ask to see the boss, if I've made a complaint, it gets sorted." People told us they were given choices about their care, and their views and rights were consistently met and acted on.

The provider had effective processes in place to monitor and manage people's safety and to respond to any concerns raised by people, staff and other stakeholders. Records showed that staff had received safeguarding training relevant to their role. Systems were in place to reinforce the importance of safeguarding and to monitor people who may not be able to voice their views. The provider's safeguarding policies reflected national based guidance. Safeguarding logs assisted the registered manager in identifying any trends and take action as needed.

Staff told us they had received safeguarding training and were clear about when and how they would report safeguarding concerns internally and to external safeguarding agencies. The registered manager understood their role in protecting people from abuse and ensuring effective safeguarding systems were in place to keep people safe. They ensured staff had the right training for their role and promoted an open culture to ensure staff reported any concerns or incidents.

Staff and the registered manager had a good understanding of people's needs and understood the measures in place to support people to minimise their risks. The registered manager had oversight of people with higher risks. Effective systems, evidence- based risk management and monitoring tools were used to monitor people's risks and communicate changes in people's needs with staff. Staff had access to care plans and risk assessments which guided them to the information they needed to support people safely. Referrals to relevant health care professionals were made as needed and their recommendations were followed. Staff had a good understanding in managing people's risks such as risk of choking and falls and the actions they should take in an emergency.

People told us that staff supported them to minimise their risks. People's needs had been identified, assessed and recorded. They told us their care and risks were regularly reviewed and updated and they were involved in the management and decisions relating to their care and risks.

The provider had effective processes in place to monitor people's personal risks. We found people's risk were being managed and monitored well through a combination of the registered managers knowledge of people's needs, good communication between staff and effective auditing systems. Any concerns were recorded and escalated to the relevant health services.

We observed an established staff team caring for people with dignity and compassion. They knew people well and understand their needs, risks and preferences. Staff consistently spoke to people respectfully and supported them in line with their care plan and care needs.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

During our assessment, we observed sufficient numbers of staff deployed to meet people’s needs and requests for support. Through our observations, we were assured that staff had been trained and skilled to support people safely.

The provider had effective processes in place to ensure people were supported by a consistent staff team who knew people well and were trained to carry out their role. The provider's staff development and recruitment policies and processes assisted the register manager in maintaining a reliable and knowledgeable staff team. Records showed safe recruitment practices had been followed. Systems showed that staff training and support was being monitored to ensure staff remained current and supported in their role. Progress was being made to ensure all staff had received their annual appraisal.

Staff confirmed that pre-employment checks and training had been completed before they started to support people. An established staff team ensured people received continuity of care. The registered manager stated they consistently reviewed and adjusted the staff levels of the home according to people's needs. The registered manager said they worked alongside staff which enabled them to monitor the staffing levels and staff skills and act on any concerns.

People confirmed they were supported by a regular staff team who know them well. They told us staff were supportive and they felt staff had been trained to care for them.

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Medicines optimisation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.